Happy Hanukkah

[Philothei]

Wishing someone Happy Hanukkah is NOT a point of excommunication of the EO church .....just sayin... There are EO who are Jewish and so they celebrate that feast...I think that there is no canon that would forbids that....Now going to the extreme to celebrate Hanukkah and not the birth of Christ then we got a problem KWIM?

Thanks for the information that you posted above by Yeshua HaDerekh

BTW what does your name mean ??

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Wishing someone Happy Hanukkah is NOT a point of excommunication of the EO church .....just sayin... There are EO who are Jewish and so they celebrate that feast...I think that there is no canon that would forbids that....Now going to the extreme to celebrate Hanukkah and not the birth of Christ then we got a problem KWIM?

Thanks for the information that you posted above by Yeshua HaDerekh

BTW what does your name mean ??

Basically Yeshua Ha Derekh means "Jesus The Way". In the early church, Christianity was called "The Way".

The early Church in Jerusalem was headed by James the Righteous and the Desposyni. The Jerusalem Church had 15 Jewish bishops (Bishops of the circumcision) leading the Holy Assembly of the Hebrews until around 135 AD (James, Symeon, Justus, Zacchaeus, Tobias, Benjamin, John, Matthias, Philip, Senecah, Justus II, Levi, Ephres, Joseph and finally, Judah). They had a falling out with Bishop Sylvester of Rome around 318 AD.

 

[rusmeister]

"However I HAVE gotten PMs from other Orthodox people here (only 2 of them have actually posted here) that definitely do not agree with your position at all."

So what? There are some Orthodox people who believe abortion and homosexual activity is just hunky dory, so does that mean those two things are ok? Our faith is a revealed faith, passed down to us by the Apostles, not determined by democratic vote.

Your last is true, but consensus IS why we know that abortion, homosexual acts and trying to be both (religiously) Jewish AND Orthodox are wrong - because consensus forbids them.

G, you use many words, too many, and they DO distract from and cloud, rather than clarifying the issue. Your general tendency is to say that there is so much diversity that there's no truth; any position can be held and defended on the grounds you defend this stuff on.

To all and sundry: I'm done arguing. Keep Jewish religious holidays out of our Orthodox calendar and try not to push Hebrew onto people that don't want it. That's all. There's nothing else to say.

 

[GregConstantine]

"Your last is true, but consensus IS why we know that abortion, homosexual acts and trying to be both (religiously) Jewish AND Orthodox are wrong - because consensus forbids them."

Yes, the Church is counciliar, but we have consensus according to what is the Apostolic faith passed down to us by our fathers, not by popular nor individual vote or popular/individual emotions or feelings. The consensus by popular or individual vote and feelings is what I was addressing.

G, we've been talking about your writing style, I don't think anyone here is attacking you personally. Although I can see how one might perceive a critique of one's writing style to be an attack on them personally, but it's not.

I'm sorry, but I find that I have to scroll through your posts not because of the lenght per se, but they are so verboise with many run on sentences and points that are all over the place. They do not tend to be coherent all the time. I'm sorry, but I do not accept your ideas that because there's diversity in language usage, therefore, there's no standard in writing and I can just willy nilly write however I want and if you don't understand it, well then too bad. (That's how you are coming across)

 

[GregConstantine]

"In the early church, Christianity was called "The Way"."

Yesh, we are the early Church

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

"In the early church, Christianity was called "The Way"."

Yesh, we are the early Church

And I said otherwise where?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Yesh, we are the early Church

No one argued on who the Church was - but what was addressed was the fact that you already went against it in claiming the Early Saints - from the Apostles to the Saints - didn't appreciate or celebrate Jewish Feasts as well as the Calender. That is diametrically opposed to what the Church has said - as well as opposite of what the Church has continued on in many parts of Orthodoxy, be it OO or EO.

Yes, the Church is counciliar, but we have consensus according to what is the Apostolic faith passed down to us by our fathers.

Sincerely, none of that has anything to do with addressing the fact, Philothei noted well, that there is no cannon nor anything within the history of the Orthodox Church saying another Orthodox person cannot wish a "Happy Chanukah" to others - nor anything showing that Chanukah was not done by Jewish Orthodox Christians, be it the Apostles or others. And that is something remembered by those today within the Church.

Thus again, to talk against it can really be akin to being against an imagination of what the Church was against rather than dealing with what the Church said - for the Church Fathers and the Apostles already spoke on the issue.

G, we've been talking about your writing style, I don't think anyone here is attacking you personally. Although I can see how one might perceive a critique of one's writing style to be an attack on them personally, but it's not.

I'm sorry, but I find that I have to scroll through your posts not because of the lenght per se, but they are so verboise with many run on sentences and points that are all over the place. They do not tend to be coherent all the time. I'm sorry, but I do not accept your ideas that because there's diversity in language usage, therefore, there's no standard in writing and I can just willy nilly write however I want

Greg,

When one tries to wage a crusade at length on discussing a posting style, it's already personal since it is demanding one change their personal preference to suit the personal preference of others - and then trying to switch into discussion on why the style of writing you personally prefer is to be seen as the best.

In regards to the OP, that's really off-topic - a red herring essentially.

Greg, IMHO, the bottom line is that is a red herring speaking on writing style in light of the fact that the same sentiments have already been shared on several others doing the same at various points - many others pointing out the hypocrisy in what occurs when others either write the same, have been verbose/justified it or done likewise - and others have already noted it to not be an issue.

This has been said to me as well by others who already pointed out it is not an issue except by those wishing to find excuse for NOT dealing with things when they prefer it.

And as said before, it is off topic with personal discussion of posters (as well as against the rules). I'd advise to cease with it since it is not really difficult doing likewise examining your own writing style and where it lacks at multiple points - regardless of where you avoided dealing with in the run on sentences you already did, broken English, the use of contractions at improper points(as well as text language scattered at numerous junctions) and a lack of understanding basics in slang on an online forum.

Making an argument on "points all over the place" has no bearing on actually addressing points - for again, that is an ad hominem that is off topic to addressing the issue....and as others have already noted plainly where things made sense/are easily understandable, it's your own issue of refusing to address information. Moreover, as said before, it is a willingness to promote falsehood when claiming others said there was no standard in writing - that was your own claim and it was already noted that diversity doesn't equate to standards being non-existent. For English has differing writings styles within the camp of English.

To not understand that is to not understand basics in English or dialect. It is what it is and something you'll just have to get over. Even with English, this is a basic when it comes to the reality of complex thought/sentence structure being a form of communication - and plenty of English papers have been written on that. But as said before, this is off topic - and if it continues, it'll simply be ignored.

.

G, you use many words, too many, .and they DO distract from and cloud, rather than clarifying the issue.

R,

As said before, it's inconsistent every single time you attempt to speak on the issue since it has been noted to you by others where you use too many words or attempts at explanations, even though others had no issue with it. If you wish to promote a double-standard, by all means - but it's not difficult to realize and it's something you'll need to get over


And as noted before, it is apparent where you've been unable to deal with that reality since you've been verbose numerous occasions (especially with G.K. exposition) and ruminating on things no one was asking for. Some of this has already been addressed before - as seen in older threads such as Rusmeister...leaving? ) when saying that others didn't read what you read and you felt underappreciated...and it was stated that your style was something that turned people off - from quoting excerpts of G.K to writing at length with what you disagreed on (seen in #6, #20 #24 #48 #94 #197 ).

Moreover, as much as it is something you claim to be against this, there is a tendency to go toward sophistry and emotional appeals (i.e. "How could you not think this is wrong?!! It is just something that has to be understood!!", etc.) as if that proves anything.

When you quite writing at length/being verbose or assuming everyone sees you as being otherwise, then it'll be seen that one can be accurate with themselves. Till then, it's an argumentation of equivocation and "Do as I say, Not as I do." . ..and as it is, others choose to understand because they choose to be interested. It's the same in reverse - for from rep notes to writing on my profile to PMs and in the forum openly on multiple occasions (#89 ) , there've been plenty having no issue with writing style at all and it is them I keep in mind.

Your general tendency is to say that there is so much diversity that there's no truth; any position can be held and defended on the grounds you defend this stuff on.

Diversity within the Body of Christ (or the world isn't the same as saying there's no absolute truth that can be verified - something multiple others within Orthodoxy have noted for centuries.

And this has been pointed out to you repeatedly. It has already been noted in other places (#22 ) Outside of where it has been mentioned before to you when it came to disagreements...as noted before:

(Traditional) Eurocentric thought IS superior (vis-a-vis Asia). That's a shocker to the modern graduate of schools of "liberal" thought, but it is true, and it is true insofar as it is/was Christian.

Disagree, IMHO (to a degree)....and to be specific, that's not said in regards to the religious views of the East since there was much spiritualism in the East that often crippled it when seeing what occurred in the West.

Spiritualism or mysticism in/of itself isn't a bad thing, as Eastern Christianity is full of it...but apart from the Lord, it is damaging. And the West thankfully didn't have as much of that. There were plenty of other damaging things to deal with in the West that the East didn't have to deal with, especially after the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West/some of the things present in Barbarian culture.....with the Christianity in the East often being superior to Western Christianity on many levels.

But there were many things within Eurocentric thought that had more strength than other parts of the world due to Christendom.

Shared before how I was blessed to be able to go to a recent musuem entitled "Passages" ..and at that gathering, there was a book I was able to pick up that really blessed me. It's entitled The Book that Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization by Vishal Mangalwadi.

​

Mandalwadi, who comes from a Hindu background (and is in line with other wonderful thinkers such as Ravi Zacharias) makes the argument that no one can ever truly know western culture without reading and understanding the Bible, even if they happen to disagree with what it says....and tracing the ways that the Bible helped to give Western Civilization/Europe the ability to advance beyond other parts of the world is rather fascinating. Very brilliant insights and so glad Mandalwadi brought up the insights that he did.

Dr Vishal Mangalwadi Interview - Adelaide, Australia
Dr Vishal Mangalwadi: The Book that made your world
Jesus Among Other gods​

​

Other things similar have been said elsewhere.


At NO point has it ever been said that diversity in general means that there's no truth - no phrase, nor sentiment can be shown to indicate explicitly from what I have said. To say otherwise and continue claiming such after others have already noted directly where they said no such thing at any point is to promote falsehood willingly and that's never a good thing (Leviticus 19:15-17/Proverbs 10:18 /Proverbs 12:19 /Proverbs 12:22 ). It'd behoove you to keep that in mind.

For there's no escaping the fact that being willing to create imaginary scenarios with those things we have little experience (or awareness on) is the tendency you go into with anything you don't like - the ideology that if it disagrees with you and what'll support your desire to be correct, then it must be false. Of course it's easy to think one's dealing correctly with theological issues from that basis.....

However, that is never something that'll either Biblical or accurate. Truth is established by Christ - and what He noted in the scriptures. Within the scriptures, there were diverse groups and yet they all followed the truth found in the Lord - just as it is today. Trying to limit it to a Monocultural view of it being one way in order to have truth is a reflection of one's cultural leaning - something we already discussed when comparing views on immigration, pluralism and your discomfort with different groups interacting. But it is not according to what truth was described by in the Epistles or the Apostles.


As long as there's resistance in getting over the general tendency to ignore whatever you disagree with as if it doesn't exist - or taking offense with anything you feel passionate on not being able to be defended - the bottom line is that there will continually be more arguments that do false argumentation on what others say. This already occurred earlier with you claiming the wild ideas noted earlier like saying believing in diversity means there are no standards - yet there was not a shred of evidence or dealing with what has already been said in Orthodoxy counter to your view.

Whether or not you choose to live in the world/deal with diverse groups outside of your own has little bearing on their validity or their existence in the Church by God's Design. And this has been noted by others to you before (as seen in #101 for example).

Keep Jewish religious holidays out of our Orthodox calendar and try not to push Hebrew onto people that don't want it. That's all. There's nothing else to say

And in all of this, it was never shown that the Orthodox Church never appreciated or valued Jewish Religious Holidays - nor was there willingness to deal with multiple branches (i.e. Coptic Orthodox, Indian Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, etc.) within Orthodoxy who have no issue with them nor see inconsistency with the Orthodox Calendar. This also goes with already pushing language/writing styles onto people that do not all agree with it and yet still trying to discriminate against those who do so - but none of that will suffice for factual argument.


At the end of the day, it comes back to whether one wishes to deal with the Church as it is.....or approach the Church demanding it to be what it isn't.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Your last is true, but consensus IS why we know that abortion, homosexual acts and trying to be both (religiously) Jewish AND Orthodox are wrong - because consensus forbids them.

To all and sundry: I'm done arguing. Keep Jewish religious holidays out of our Orthodox calendar and try not to push Hebrew onto people that don't want it. That's all. There's nothing else to say.

There you go again Rus! We have Jewish religious Holy Days on our calendar Rus...They were instituted by God, only now they are fulfilled in Christ. You can't be religiously Jewish and Orthodox Rus, Jews do not believe in Christ...yet. Some Jews do...and they do not stop being Jews just as Russians do not stop being Russian when Orthodox Christian.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Wishing someone Happy Hanukkah is NOT a point of excommunication of the EO church .....just sayin... There are EO who are Jewish and so they celebrate that feast...I think that there is no canon that would forbids that....Now going to the extreme to celebrate Hanukkah and not the birth of Christ then we got a problem KWIM?

Thank you for noting that - as one REALLY has to stretch claiming no one in EO is allowed to say "Happy Hanukkah" for fear of excommunication when the history of the Church never supported that. Jewish Orthodox believers and many within EO/OO have said this for centuries - and it is the case where it was repeatedly noted how one could be Jewish culturally/religiously and Orthodox in the same way another can be Gentile culturally/religiously and be Orthodox due to the consensus of the Early Church and what Christ lived out himself.

That a group of people (or individuals) take issue with seeing others be Jewish Orthodox in practice when it comes to celebrating the feasts (in view of Christ's work) is not the same as showing what the Church felt on the issue in all ages. It seems that people may be quick to think excommunication due to thinking well of Chanukah because they have an incomplete view of what it means to actually be Jewish - or Judaize.

That is NOT "JUDAIZING" historically ....and to throw out the term or get upset on it is to not understand what the term was actually about or how it applies today.

As noted best elsewhere - Saint James' Kids: We Are the Circumcision (Phil. 3:1-6) :

The Judaizers,
The Judaizing tendency is the heretical counterpart of Jewish Christianity. It so insists on the unity of Christianity with Judaism, as to sink the former to the level of the latter, and to make the gospel no more than an improvement or a perfected law. It regards Christ as a mere prophet, a second Moses; and denies or at least wholly overlooks, his divine nature and his priestly and kingly offices. The Judaizers were Jews in fact, and Christians only in appearance and in name. They held circumcision and the whole moral and ceremonial law of Moses to be still binding, and the observance of them necessary to salvation. Of Christianity as a new, free, and universal religion, they had no conception. Hence they hated Paul, the Liberal apostle of the Gentiles, as a dangerous apostate and revolutionist, impugned his motives, and everywhere, especially in Galatia and Corinth, labored to undermine his authority in the churches.


​

The Judaizers were a heretical sect of Jewish Christians who followed St. Paul around. After St. Paul would leave a town to go preach the Gospel in the next town, the Judiazers would go into the first town and try to lead the new Christians into their false teaching. They taught that if a Gentile wanted to become a Christian, they had to first become a Jew. Men would have to be circumcised, and all converts would have to submit to following the entire Mosaic Law. They were violently opposed to St. Paul’s gospel of grace, calling him a false teacher.

​

None of that, of course, has even happened in TAW at ANY point. No one has advocated for Gentiles to HAVE to do Biblical Feasts. No one has advocated for folks to HAVE to become circumcised - or that Christ wasn't the FINAL revelation, as the Judaizers did. Those are all things done by the camps which were condemned by the Early Saints - the Ebionites included (as said in #20/#91

What has been noted is what others within Orthodoxy have done in appreciation for the Jewish culture that Christ, the Apostles/Early Leaders of the Church (i.e. St. James, St. John, St.Barnabas, etc.) and the saints did - and when they appreciate that they are in no way "Judaizing".....but arguing that others (whether Jewish Orthodox or Gentile Orthodox appreciating Jewish practice) are believing the Church is "imperfect" go opposite of what the Early Church noted on the issue.


And it does come off highly odd whenever it seems people try to say one cannot be EO and celebrate a feast as a Jewish person in light of the fact that we have Jewish religious Holy Days on our calendar that were instituted by God, now fulfilled in Christ. Jews don't stop being Jews when they become Orthodox Christians just as Russians don't stop being Russian when they become Orthodox Jews ...or Jamaicans cease being Jamaican when they become Orthodox (in the West Indies) or Serbians who don't stop being Serbian when they become Orthodox and so on.

KWIM?

By the way, what does KWIM mean? Still trying to make certain my text language is on point - and as said earlier, it's always changing. But I'm guessing it means "Know what I mean?" - hope I got it right.

Thanks for the information that you posted above by Yeshua HaDerekh

Ditto on the sentiments

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Basically Yeshua Ha Derekh means "Jesus The Way". In the early church, Christianity was called "The Way".

The early Church in Jerusalem was headed by James the Righteous and the Desposyni. The Jerusalem Church had 15 Jewish bishops (Bishops of the circumcision) leading the Holy Assembly of the Hebrews until around 135 AD (James, Symeon, Justus, Zacchaeus, Tobias, Benjamin, John, Matthias, Philip, Senecah, Justus II, Levi, Ephres, Joseph and finally, Judah). They had a falling out with Bishop Sylvester of Rome around 318 AD.

The Church in Jerusalem was truly fascinating - especially St. James and the dynamics he had to contend with. And on the choice of your name, it's a good choice (IMHO)

We have Jewish religious Holy Days on our calendar ...They were instituted by God, only now they are fulfilled in Christ.... Jews do not believe in Christ...yet. Some Jews do...and they do not stop being Jews just as Russians do not stop being Russian when Orthodox Christian.

Spot on with the Holiday dynamic. In the event people use arguments such as saying "Well it's the case that the Jewish holidays on the Orthodox calendar are called by Christian names as opposed to the Jewish ones", it should noted that in those cases people reflect the tendency to wish to escape from anything that is explicitly Jewish in identity - even though they can never escape the fact that the Feasts themselves were JEWISH in nature alongside many other things that also developed.

A name change is not the same as substance change - nor does focusing on the name address the roots of where things come from. Jewish Orthodox Christians have long pointed this out when it comes to seeing the ways that change of names never was a matter of content changing when it comes to cultural translation.

Whenever people get uncomfortable with that reality, it's similar to how many within Black culture developed musical styles - from Jazz to R&B to Neo Soul - and then other Caucasians saw it, assimilated it and then changed the names of the genres because of having previous sentiments against black culture that caused them to not even be reminded of where the roots of their activities came from....

There have been others who've done excellent reviews on the subject

Here
Here​

One thing I've noticed is that there are many within Russian Orthodoxy who've noted it to be problematic whenever it seems that others from the Jewish world are told they must cease being Jewish (even though those who are Russian have no issue remaining Russian while being Orthodox - yet Gentile) - and this is a long standing issue that many within the Church have been seeking to address.

One of my sisters in Christ (who is Russian and Jewish as well as Orthodox) has noted this often - noting the reality of how often people claim to have no issue against Jews.....and yet in practice, discriminate highly against them/their culture in the same way Native-Americans were told by settlers/colonialists preaching Christ that the Lord hated all things with First-Nation groups/their culture (never mind what occurred with the Samaritan and Gentile encounters with Christ where he didn't demand they change all aspects of their background to follow Him) - and yet nothing was seen wrong with European culture. It was essentially a matter of being told "Jesus loves you - but he really doesn't like you that much...at least not as much as me" And for Jews within the Orthodox Church, this is a reality that they have had to deal with for centuries - yet it is again being addressed thankfully......with people pointing out that you don't have to cease being Jewish when you come to faith in the Messiah.


For good review:

• THE JEWISH QUESTION IN THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX- Gregory Benevitch
• Doubly Chosen I: The Jew Breaks in Two | The Groom's Family
• Doubly Chosen II: Freedom and Truth | The Groom's Family
• Doubly Chosen III: A Great Men [sic] | The Groom's Family
• Doubly Chosen IV and Final: They Put The Jew Together Again | The Groom's Family

And for places where previous discussion occurred:

In marginal social circles - yes, a lot. I believe it is unsafe for non-whites to move around in Russia, even the big city centers, but especially on the outskirts. They have their mind set on "clearing" the invaders out of our land, and there is no reasoning with them. Most Jews moved out of Russia and Ukraine - and were absolutely right.

Thank you for noting this, as I was wondering on some of those same dynamics recently (as seen here )..and although it seems that it's safe for other non-whites in certain parts of Russia, I was thankful to become aware of how it's indeed a battle ground for others in differing areas--especially places such as Moscow. For others who are non-whites and have refused to leave Russia due to how they see themselves as connected with the land/its people and are active nationalists for their land, it can be interesting to see the ways that events play out. I've heard it said where there's not alot of racism toward those who are non-white---but I really don't see how that can be the case when so many Russians have noted the same thing and it's not secret that many have been either beaten or killed. That is not something one can just dismiss and say it never went down.

At best, I think it could be said that vantage points make a difference since where you're looking from makes a world of difference---and in a country so vast as Russia with many differing realms where people can sometimes only be connected with people in their area, there may not be an awareness of what happens in other places. It's akin to living in the U.S and seeing someone from the North have no idea of all of the dynamics occurring in the South such as discrimination against biracial marriages since they also had discrimination up North--but are more accepting of biracial marriages on the whole/may not see some of the things as those in the South do. In the same way, what may happen for some non-whites in parts of Russia---such as Siberia--may be a good experience while what occurs in other parts may be highly negative....and some people may never be fully aware of how not all areas are as welcoming as the ones they see.

But with the aspect of saying discrimination is against non-whites, I would wonder how that really plays out since there are many who are either people of color or are themselves immigrants from other lands that are "White." In example, those who are from Central Asia have gotten alot of harrassment even though some of them can look "white" just as many native Russians....and many Russians themselves who were never "invaders" were of darker complexion due to their ancestry/having people of an African background in their bloodlines.


With the Jews , although many have left Russia/Ukraine, I've been tripped out seeing how many Jewish communities have decided to stay in Russia and set up camp. As said elsewhere, it's amazing to consider the battles occurring in Russia's Far East--and the struggles of those in Russian who are Central Asian Jews. They have enormous struggles , firstly with being Jewish...and then secondly being Central Asian. It can be complicated for them being apart of the Russian culture, with their Jewishness being something that was often despised and then complicated by the struggles of also being Central Asian in a culture they wish to adapt to--but rarely find acceptance in due to the stances others have about immigrants. For reference:

• Bukharan Jews
• "The History of Bukharian Jews"
• History of Bukharian Jews - Beth Gavriel Center
• "Bukharan Jews – History and Cultural Relations
• The history of the Central Asian republics
• Russia and east Asia: the 21st century security environment
• Moving Back Into the Orbit? - Russia's Influence in Central Asia
• Culture and customs of the Central Asian republics By Rafis Abazov
• Russia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia: the 21st century security ...
• Central Asians under Russian rule: a study in culture change - Page 22
• Russian Jews on three continents: migration and resettlement - Page 150
• The new Central Asia: the regional impact of international actors - Page 149
• Russia's protectorates in Central Asia: Bukhara and Khiva, 1865-1924 - Page 130
• "Looking Out for One's Own Identity: Central Asian Jews in the Wake of Communism
• Russian Central Asia: including Kuldja, Bokhara, Khiva and Merv: Volume 2 - Page 105

Interesting, IMHO...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

On the final night of Hanukkah, I will post this:

The seven holy Maccabee martyrs, Abim, Antonius, Gurias, Eleazar, Eusebonus, Alimus and Marcellus, their mother, Solomonia, and their teacher, Eleazar, suffered for Christ in 166 under Syrian King Antiochus IV. The king loved pagan and Hellenistic customs, and held Jewish customs in contempt. He did everything possible to turn people from the Law of Moses and from their covenant with God. He desecrated the Temple of the Lord, placed a statue of the pagan god Zeus there, and forced the Jews to worship it. Many people abandoned the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but there were also those who continued to believe that the Savior would come.
A ninety-year-old elder, the scribe and teacher Eleazar, was brought to trial for his faithfulness to the Mosaic Law. He suffered tortures and died at Jerusalem.
The disciples of St. Eleazar, the seven Maccabee brothers and their mother, Solomonia, also displayed great courage. They were eventually brought to trial in Antioch by King Antiochus. They fearlessly acknowledged themselves as followers of the True God, and refused to eat pork, which was forbidden by the Law.
The eldest brother acted as spokesmen for the rest, saying that they preferred to die rather than break the Law. He was subjected to fierce tortures in sight of his brothers and their mother. His tongue was cut out, he was scalped, and his hands and feet were cut off. A cauldron and a large frying pan were then heated, and the first brother was thrown into the frying pan where he offered his soul up to God.
The next five brothers were tortured one after the other. The seventh and youngest brother was the last one left alive. King Antiochus suggested to their mother, St. Solomonia, that she persuade the boy to obey him, so that her last son at least would be spared. Instead, the brave mother told him to imitate the courage of his brothers.
After all her seven children had died, St. Solomonia stood over their bodies, raised up her hands in prayer to God and died.
The martyric death of the Maccabee brothers inspired Judas Maccabeus, and he led a revolt against King Antiochus. With God’s help, he was victorious, and then purified the Temple at Jerusalem. He also destroyed the altars which the pagans had set up in the streets. All these events are related in the Second Book of Maccabees (Ch. 8-10). Many Church Fathers preached sermons on the seven Maccabees, including St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Ambrose of Milan, St. Gregory Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom.

Troparion (Tone 7)
Let us praise the seven Maccabees,
with their mother Solomonia and their teacher Eleazar;
they were splendid in lawful contest
as guardians of the teachings of the Law.
Now as Christ’s holy martyrs they ceaselessly intercede for the world.


Kontakion (Tone 2)
Seven pillars of the Wisdom of God
and seven lampstands of the divine Light,
all-wise Maccabees, greatest of the martyrs before the time of the martyrs, with them ask the God of all to save those who honor you.

Thanks for sharing this - remembering the Maccabean Martyrs and what they did in seeking to keep themselves pure so that they'd be worthy of what would come later, it's definitely sobering to consider how much we've been given the same in Christ and therefor should not give up our sights on the Kingdom that is to come.....nor forget the sacrifices of those before us who we are connected to in their joys and struggle.


One unshakeable kingdom which we should be willing to sacrifice for since it's Real - and praying for grace to never forget that

Here​

Hebrews 11:31
32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah, about David and Samuel and the prophets, 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. 35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. There were others who were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection. 36 Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were put to death by stoning;[e they were sawed in two; they were killed by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— 38 the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, living in caves and in holes in the ground.

39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40 since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Hebrews 12:29
22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

25 See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? 26 At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.”[e] 27 The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain.

28 Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, 29 for our “God is a consuming fire.”

[/quote]

​

 

[rusmeister]

There you go again Rus! We have Jewish religious Holy Days on our calendar Rus...They were instituted by God, only now they are fulfilled in Christ. You can't be religiously Jewish and Orthodox Rus, Jews do not believe in Christ...yet. Some Jews do...and they do not stop being Jews just as Russians do not stop being Russian when Orthodox Christian.

The "Jewish" holidays on our calendar are called by Christian names, not Jewish ones.
But I said I'm done arguing.

There is ancient folk wisdom, expressed in English as "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." Russians say "You don't take your own samovar (tea kettle) to Tula." (a city famous for its production of elaborate samovars), and "One doesn't take one's own Rule to another's monastery." Perhaps you could share the Hebrew equivalent; I would be very interested in it.

 

[rusmeister]

Wishing someone Happy Hanukkah is NOT a point of excommunication of the EO church .....just sayin... There are EO who are Jewish and so they celebrate that feast...I think that there is no canon that would forbids that....Now going to the extreme to celebrate Hanukkah and not the birth of Christ then we got a problem KWIM?

Thanks for the information that you posted above by Yeshua HaDerekh

BTW what does your name mean ??

I think it much more important for our members to get that a number of people were upset by what I take was meant to be a well-meaning gesture, and that it would be better to withdraw the gesture than to insist on defending it.

Put another way, it is better NOT to say "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays" if you know it is going to start a fight.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

On the final night of Hanukkah, I will post this:

The seven holy Maccabee martyrs, Abim, Antonius, Gurias, Eleazar, Eusebonus, Alimus and Marcellus, their mother, Solomonia, and their teacher, Eleazar, suffered for Christ in 166 under Syrian King Antiochus IV. The king loved pagan and Hellenistic customs, and held Jewish customs in contempt. He did everything possible to turn people from the Law of Moses and from their covenant with God. He desecrated the Temple of the Lord, placed a statue of the pagan god Zeus there, and forced the Jews to worship it. Many people abandoned the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but there were also those who continued to believe that the Savior would come.
A ninety-year-old elder, the scribe and teacher Eleazar, was brought to trial for his faithfulness to the Mosaic Law. He suffered tortures and died at Jerusalem.
The disciples of St. Eleazar, the seven Maccabee brothers and their mother, Solomonia, also displayed great courage. They were eventually brought to trial in Antioch by King Antiochus. They fearlessly acknowledged themselves as followers of the True God, and refused to eat pork, which was forbidden by the Law.
The eldest brother acted as spokesmen for the rest, saying that they preferred to die rather than break the Law. He was subjected to fierce tortures in sight of his brothers and their mother. His tongue was cut out, he was scalped, and his hands and feet were cut off. A cauldron and a large frying pan were then heated, and the first brother was thrown into the frying pan where he offered his soul up to God.
The next five brothers were tortured one after the other. The seventh and youngest brother was the last one left alive. King Antiochus suggested to their mother, St. Solomonia, that she persuade the boy to obey him, so that her last son at least would be spared. Instead, the brave mother told him to imitate the courage of his brothers.
After all her seven children had died, St. Solomonia stood over their bodies, raised up her hands in prayer to God and died.
The martyric death of the Maccabee brothers inspired Judas Maccabeus, and he led a revolt against King Antiochus. With God’s help, he was victorious, and then purified the Temple at Jerusalem. He also destroyed the altars which the pagans had set up in the streets. All these events are related in the Second Book of Maccabees (Ch. 8-10). Many Church Fathers preached sermons on the seven Maccabees, including St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Ambrose of Milan, St. Gregory Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom.

Troparion (Tone 7)
Let us praise the seven Maccabees,
with their mother Solomonia and their teacher Eleazar;
they were splendid in lawful contest
as guardians of the teachings of the Law.
Now as Christ’s holy martyrs they ceaselessly intercede for the world.


Kontakion (Tone 2)
Seven pillars of the Wisdom of God
and seven lampstands of the divine Light,
all-wise Maccabees, greatest of the martyrs before the time of the martyrs, with them ask the God of all to save those who honor you.

I do wonder what it'd be like to live in the time of the Maccabean warriors for the Lord when it came to their sacrifice and how intense that would have been.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Wishing someone Happy Hanukkah is NOT a point of excommunication of the EO church .....just sayin... There are EO who are Jewish and so they celebrate that feast...I think that there is no canon that would forbids that....Now going to the extreme to celebrate Hanukkah and not the birth of Christ then we got a problem KWIM?

Thanks for the information that you posted above by Yeshua HaDerekh

What you note is something that would be beneficial for others in Orthodoxy to understand when it comes to the reality that being upset over something isn't the same as having basis for saying it should be withdrawn.

For if others are bothered by someone saying "Happy Chanukah" - despite where other Orthodox were not bothered and are Jewish Orthodox Christians appreciating the time - that doesn't become the basis for removing it when it cannot be shown in the history of the Church that doing so was never allowed. We already have others within Orthodoxy bothered if you wish "Merry Christmas!!" instead of saying one wishes a Blessed Epiphany /Feast of the Nativity - but that doesn't equate to saying that "Merry Christmas" is not to be used because others wish to fight over it when it goes past their own preferences or what they'd like to enforce on others.

As people of Grace, we're to walk in grace/kindness - and on the Nativity Fast, it's really not a time to be tripping on people wishing "Happy Chanukah"/being prone to fight rather than reflect what Christ did in His own life.

As St. Paul noted:

Romans 14

The Weak and the Strong


14 Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

5One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind.6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. 8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:

“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will acknowledge God.’”[b

12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
​

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister.

​

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The "Jewish" holidays on our calendar are called by Christian names, not Jewish ones.
But I said I'm done arguing.

Like "Pascha" (Passover) and Shavout (weeks) "Pentecost"? Same names Rus...give it a break...

Pascha - OrthodoxWiki : Pascha is a transliteration of the Greek word, which is itself a transliteration of the Hebrew pesach, both words meaning PASSOVER.

Pentecost - OrthodoxWiki : Fifty days after the Resurrection on the Jewish feast of Pentecost, while the disciples and many other followers of Jesus Christ were gathered together to pray, the Holy Spirit descended upon them in the form of "cloven tongues of fire," with the sound of a mighty rushing wind, and they began to speak in languages that they did not know. There were many visitors from the Jewish diaspora to Jerusalem at that time for the Jewish observance of the feast, and they were astonished to hear these untaught fisherman speaking praises to God in their alien tongues.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

GxgGsquared,

I have to say, G, it's unfair of you to paint Rus in that light and try to make him out to be a hypocrite. I have been reading Rus's posts for years now, and normally he is fairly adept at making his points with as much brevity as he is able to muster. He doesn't write super long posts usually. He is able to make his points succinctly.

I think it is worth noting that you are debating an Orthodox Christian in an Orthodox forum and being somewhat antagonistic. Rus is pointing out your argument being a poor one and your posting style being what I have also said for years: way too long, embedded with gobs and gobs of links and videos that nobody clicks on or watches, and they become more distracting than effective. If I were you, I'd listen to the admonishment that you don't exercise brevity. You are not able to make your case without writing a treatise. You are a Coptic Christian now, and that is a faith that we Orthodox in here (myself included for sure) deeply respect. However, the non-Chalcedonian churches are not in full communion with we Orthodox Christians. We are not in full communion though we share great respect. I would remember that you're a guest. The aggressive debating style, the uber long wars of words, the super duper long signature, it's all something people are recommending you examine and re-think. Sometimes we need to take advice from others and amend/adjust. Are you open to listening to what Rus and others have said? Can you not take their admonitions personally, but see it as a chance to be a more effective poster, etc.?

And I am with Rus, I'm fed up with arguing/debating. I'm especially tired of the Judaizing that is going on at TAW. never in a million years did I think an Orthodox forum would be transformed into a Kibbutz!

Greg, the bottom line is that is a red herring speaking on writing style in light of the fact that the same sentiments have already been shared on several others doing the same at various points - many others pointing out the hypocrisy in what occurs when others either write the same, have been verbose/justified it or done likewise - and others have already noted it to not be an issue.

This has been said to me as well by others who already pointed out it is not an issue except by those wishing to find excuse for NOT dealing with things when they prefer it.

And as said before, it is off topic with personal discussion of posters (as well as against the rules). I'd advise to cease with it since it is not really difficult doing likewise examining your own writing style and where it lacks at multiple points - regardless of where you avoided dealing with in the run on sentences you already did, broken English, the use of contractions at improper points(as well as text language scattered at numerous junctions) and a lack of understanding basics in slang on an online forum.

Making an argument on "points all over the place" has no bearing on actually addressing points - for again, that is an ad hominem that is off topic to addressing the issue....and as others have already noted plainly where things made sense/are easily understandable, it's your own issue of refusing to address information. Moreover, as said before, it is a willingness to promote falsehood when claiming others said there was no standard in writing - that was your own claim and it was already noted that diversity doesn't equate to standards being non-existent. For English has differing writings styles within the camp of English.

To not understand that is to not understand basics in English or dialect. It is what it is and something you'll just have to get over. Even with English, this is a basic when it comes to the reality of complex thought/sentence structure being a form of communication - and plenty of English papers have been written on that. But as said before, this is off topic - and if it continues, it'll simply be ignored.

R,

As said before, you're inconsistent every single time you attempt to speak on the issue since it has been noted to you by others where you use too many words or attempts at explanations, even though others had no issue with it. If you wish to promote a double-standard, by all means - but it's not difficult to realize and it's something you'll need to get over


And as noted before, it is apparent where you've been unable to deal with that reality since you've been verbose numerous occasions (especially with G.K. exposition) and ruminating on things no one was asking for. Some of this has already been addressed before - as seen in older threads such as Rusmeister...leaving? ) when saying that others didn't read what you read and you felt underappreciated...and it was stated that your style was something that turned people off - from quoting excerpts of G.K to writing at length with what you disagreed on (seen in #6, #20 #48 #94 #197 ).

Moreover, as much as it is something you claim to be against this, there is a tendency to go toward sophistry and emotional appeals (i.e. "How could you not think this is wrong?!! It is just something that has to be understood!!", etc.) as if that proves anything.

When you quite writing at length/being verbose or assuming everyone sees you as being otherwise, then it'll be seen that one can be accurate with themselves. Till then, it's an argumentation of equivocation and "Do as I say, Not as I do." . ..and as it is, others choose to understand because they choose to be interested. It's the same in reverse - for from rep notes to writing on my profile to PMs and in the forum openly on multiple occasions (#89 ) , there've been plenty having no issue with writing style at all and it is them I keep in mind.

R, it has already been noted that diversity within the Body of Christ (or the world isn't the same as saying there's no absolute truth that can be verified - something multiple others within Orthodoxy have noted for centuries.

And this has been pointed out to you repeatedly. It has already been noted in other places (#22 ) Outside of where it has been mentioned before to you when it came to disagreements...as noted before:

​

Other things similar have been said elsewhere.


At NO point has it ever been said that diversity in general means that there's no truth - no phrase, nor sentiment can be shown to indicate explicitly from what I have said. To say otherwise and continue claiming such after others have already noted directly where they said no such thing at any point is to promote falsehood willingly and that's never a good thing (Leviticus 19:15-17/Proverbs 10:18 /Proverbs 12:19 /Proverbs 12:22 ). It'd behoove you to keep that in mind.

For there's no escaping the fact that being willing to create imaginary scenarios with those things we have little experience (or awareness on) is the tendency you go into with anything you don't like - the ideology that if it disagrees with you and what'll support your desire to be correct, then it must be false. Of course it's easy to think one's dealing correctly with theological issues from that basis.....

However, that is never something that'll either Biblical or accurate. Truth is established by Christ - and what He noted in the scriptures. Within the scriptures, there were diverse groups and yet they all followed the truth found in the Lord - just as it is today. Trying to limit it to a Monocultural view of it being one way in order to have truth is a reflection of one's cultural leaning - something we already discussed when comparing views on immigration, pluralism and your discomfort with different groups interacting. But it is not according to what truth was described by in the Epistles or the Apostles.


As long as there's resistance in getting over the general tendency to ignore whatever you disagree with as if it doesn't exist - or taking offense with anything you feel passionate on not being able to be defended - the bottom line is that there will continually be more arguments that do false argumentation on what others say. This already occurred earlier with you claiming the wild ideas noted earlier like saying believing in diversity means there are no standards - yet there was not a shred of evidence or dealing with what has already been said in Orthodoxy counter to your view.

Whether or not you choose to live in the world/deal with diverse groups outside of your own has little bearing on their validity or their existence in the Church by God's Design. And this has been noted by others to you before (as seen in #101 for example). And in all of this, it was never shown that the Orthodox Church never appreciated or valued Jewish Religious Holidays - nor was there willingness to deal with multiple branches (i.e. Coptic Orthodox, Indian Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, etc.) within Orthodoxy who have no issue with them nor see inconsistency with the Orthodox Calendar. This also goes with already pushing language/writing styles onto people that do not all agree with it and yet still trying to discriminate against those who do so - but none of that will suffice for factual argument.


At the end of the day, it comes back to whether one wishes to deal with the Church as it is.....or approach the Church demanding it to be what it isn't.

 

[GregConstantine]

"I have to say, G, it's unfair of you to paint Rus in that light (I would add myself to this as well) and try to make him out to be a hypocrite. I have been reading Rus's posts for years now, and normally he is fairly adept at making his points with as much brevity as he is able to muster. He doesn't write super long posts usually. He is able to make his points succinctly.

I think it is worth noting that you are debating an Orthodox Christian in an Orthodox forum and being somewhat antagonistic. Rus is pointing out your argument being a poor one and your posting style being what I have also said for years: way too long, embedded with gobs and gobs of links and videos that nobody clicks on or watches, and they become more distracting than effective. If I were you, I'd listen to the admonishment that you don't exercise brevity."

And:

"Are you open to listening to what Rus and others have said? Can you not take their admonitions personally, but see it as a chance to be a more effective poster, etc.?"


Amen!
And G, not once have I said anything about you personally, but you have about me in your posts, but I didn't say anything about that, but you did. I'll go back and quote you if you want. I wrote about your writing style, I did not make speculations about your inner motivations.

 

[GregConstantine]

From a website about how to write effectively:

Experiences in school leave some people with the impression that good writing simply means writing that contains no bad mistakes--that is, no errors of grammar, punctuation, or spelling. In fact, good writing is much more than just correct writing. It's writing that responds to the interests and needs of our readers.

Briefly, here are the basic characteristics of good, effective writing:

• Good writing has a clearly defined purpose.
• It makes a definite point.
• It supports that point with specific information.
• The information is clearly connected and arranged.
• The words are appropriate, and the sentences are concise, emphatic, and correct.

 

[Kristos]

Is outrage!